US to withdraw from NATO under Republican bill
-
they’re doing it very knowingly… they wrote an entire nearly 1000 page fucking document detailing exactly what they’re doing in excruciating detail.
the fascists == idiots trope needs to go bc that’s exactly what makes them dangerous. lots of these fuckers are quite intelligent and conniving. you should be weary.
Oh yeah, they have a plan all right.
Now, the plan isn't any good and everyone gets screwed, even them.
But it is, technically speaking, a plan!
-
There's no requirement for spending as a part of NATO.
Not a strict requirement, but pressure to do so. Whose idea was it to raise to 5% again? The only president who rejected the idea, Pedro Sanchez from Spain, got threatened with tariffs if Spain doesn't conform.
They have reasons. Some EU nations are former Soviet states. Just the "restore the former borders of the Soviet union" reason is reason enough
Russia has been pushing for closer political and economic ties with Europe for the past 30 years. Russia was promised that if they dismantled the communist project NATO would cease to expand eastward, and NATO kept expanding eastward regardless. Turns out NATO was never about defending Europe (because it never has), it was always about creating tensions between Russia and Europe because a continuous political alliance of industrialized nations that spans from Gibraltar to Bering would be too powerful for the US to control.
The invasion of Ukraine by Russia is almost certainly the reason your country, whichever it is, is increasing military spending.
The justification is the invasion of Ukraine. But as a European, the number of times our military has been used to defend Europe has been 0 since WW2, it's only ever used to support US imperial ambitions, to bomb brown children, or to keep control over colonies in Africa. Europe deals so much fucking damage with its imperialism, that's one of the biggest reasons I don't want military expenditure. They tell us it's to defend from "le evil Ruzzians" but 5 years later Europe will be bombing brown children with that money, mark my words. For fuck's sake Europe can't even stop supporting the genocide of Palestinians. How can you want Europe to spend more money in military instead of engaging in diplomacy and not antagonising Russia?
Do they have the strength? Why is that included here. Does it matter?
It does matter. If Europe already has the military strength to repel Russia, why do you want the extra expenditure in weapons?
They are only useful to deter other nuclear strikes,
Why wasn't the Soviet Union or any of its satellite states invaded by the west since they got the nukes, then? The cold war was raging, and yet there was no incident of overt military conflict between eastern and western block. How so?
I'd love to see the EU with its own defensive force
If love to see the EU pushing for diplomacy and not antagonising the largest country in the world which happens to be right beyond its borders. I would line to see a European military alliance independent from the US but I wouldn't like it spending 5% of the yearly budget at the cost of already starving healthcare, education and pensions. Denmark already approved to raise retirement to 70 fucking years old in order to pay for this, Finland is pushing to remove holidays from the calendar, and England already said that raising this budget will have effects on expenditure in social services. This is absolute bullshit.
We have the far right getting stronger and stronger due to the worsening living conditions of Europeans because of austerity policy and lack of intervention of things like salaries or rent prices. Cool, let's increase military expenditure to 5% right before fucking LePen, AfD, Vox and their equivalents get to the governments, what could possibly go wrong? Remember my words: in 5 years time, the European money will be spent not in conflict against Russia, but in middle east / Africa. Supporting military expenditure of the west is absolutely crazy.
You want magic, not reality. You want all the benefits of military power without any of the costs
No, I dont want the benefits of military power because I'm not a warmongering European chauvinist like you, I want the benefits of diplomacy, of social spending, and of good relations with neighbouring counteies. I don't want my fucking healthcare money to end up in the pockets of Rheinmetall in order to lobby my politicians to go to war. I'm an able-bodied male and I don't want my country to send me to be cannon fodder in the name of European imperialism.
Alright, you're just being a Russian mouthpiece.
Oh, Russia was promised NATO wouldn't expand? Not so much.
The entire rest of your comment is similar Russian drivel. I'm not going to spend any more time with this because your opinion is not founded in logic. "You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into." You have a chip on your shoulder and it's hindering your understanding.
As I think it was a professor of mine said, international politics is about power, not good. States are always doing things to make themselves more powerful. None of them are good. Some of them are just temporarily doing more evil to gain power than others. Once you look at the world with this point of view, it makes much more sense (though some leaders are just stupid, crazy, or self-obsessed).
-
I keep getting this sinking feeling that this is all leading up to a precise and coordinated attack of evil.
Russia bombards the EU, the US attacks Greenland and Canada, while Israel finally bulldozes Gaza and Iran. China takes Taiwan and the south sea.
All at the same time so NATO is overwhelmed and can’t decisively defend it all without risking spreading too thin. No matter what happens, one of the bad guys gains ground.
I honestly have no idea if this is even possible, it’s based on a dream I had a few weeks ago.
Disturbing thought though.
And add a dose of the US invading Canada and Greenland when they're no longer a part of NATO.
-
Hopefully we can trust the GG this time!
I'm sure they already have the dirt to make a persuasive argument
-
They're also threatening to annex or outright invade long-term allies. You don't want to be in a war where the people you're fighting against are the only ones who can maintain and replace your weapons.
And yet the UK is buying more American jets
-
asdf
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Also UK returned most of their colonies back to the people unlike some huge countries like russia which is still trying to expand its colonies and territories in this modern day and age. and other huge countries making claims on Greenland or Taiwan.
-
Americans have been burning paradise. Sit yout ass down and be quiet.
I mean, not to absolve America of anything, but it's not like the rest of the world hasn't been complicit in burning paradise either.
-
As directed by Vladamir Putin.
How would the military industrial complex not kill Trump if this were true?
-
And yet the UK is buying more American jets
BAE Systems is a major supplier.
-
Russians too
Russians are technically europeans too.
-
First of all, the country currently forcing my country to cut expenditure in healthcare and to put it into military is the US, not Russia.
Wrong. There's no requirement for spending as a part of NATO. There's also no requirement for the US to do anything. The invasion of Ukraine by Russia is almost certainly the reason your country, whichever it is, is increasing military spending.
Second of all, Russia doesn't have geopolitical reasons, nor the military/economic strength, to invade EU countries.
They have reasons. Some EU nations are former Soviet states. Just the "restore the former borders of the Soviet union" reason is reason enough, ignoring the resources or anything else. Do they have the strength? Why is that included here. Does it matter? It doesn't have to be smart to happen.
And even if it did, the EU has nukes so you don't need further military expenditure as deterrent.
I don't know what you people who keep bringing up nukes think they're for. You can't use them. Using them will only ensure you lose, because everyone turns against you. They are only useful to deter other nuclear strikes, and also to deter nations from creating a last stand situation where you have already lost so there's nothing to lose in using nukes. You can't win a war with nukes.
Third, even if you forget all I've said above, the EU can still have a military alliance without the US, and it would be a much better thing.
Forget or dispute? You're implying your logic is faultless. Anyway, sure. They can. They don't though. I advocate that they do. I'd love to see the EU with its own defensive force. I don't want them to be reliant on the US, like they currently are. However, that necessarily requires most EU nations to increase their military spending, which you're apparently against. You want magic, not reality. You want all the benefits of military power without any of the costs. Sorry. That can't happen.
They can. They don’t though. I advocate that they do. I’d love to see the EU with its own defensive force
Article 42
And
The command was designed in light of growing hostilities between European countries and Russia since the annexation of Crimea in 2014 and in response to logistic and bureaucratic hurdles limiting military logistics in case of a crisis.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Support_and_Enabling_Command
-
Wary, though I think we're all weary at this point as well.
i made the freudian slip originally before publishing the comment but decided to keep it in because it felt apt. lol
-
Honestly, the American far-right unknowingly dismantling US global hegemony piece by piece is pretty sick
Just when I warmed up to the idea that NATO was a necessary evil to counter Putin's worse evil.
-
they’re doing it very knowingly… they wrote an entire nearly 1000 page fucking document detailing exactly what they’re doing in excruciating detail.
the fascists == idiots trope needs to go bc that’s exactly what makes them dangerous. lots of these fuckers are quite intelligent and conniving. you should be weary.
One goal was to increase defense burden-sharing with allies. but withdraw from NATO wasn't a project goal.
-
Alright, you're just being a Russian mouthpiece.
Oh, Russia was promised NATO wouldn't expand? Not so much.
The entire rest of your comment is similar Russian drivel. I'm not going to spend any more time with this because your opinion is not founded in logic. "You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into." You have a chip on your shoulder and it's hindering your understanding.
As I think it was a professor of mine said, international politics is about power, not good. States are always doing things to make themselves more powerful. None of them are good. Some of them are just temporarily doing more evil to gain power than others. Once you look at the world with this point of view, it makes much more sense (though some leaders are just stupid, crazy, or self-obsessed).
Such an agreement was never made," NATO says in a fact page on its website, one of multiple pages that addresses the Russian allegations. "NATO’s door has been open to new members since it was founded in 1949 — and that has never changed."
In the Tucker interview Putin references the meeting where he asked for membership. The minutes of that meeting could have been published to proof him wrong. In other words Russia was kept out and as an opponent by the choice of Nato.
Besides the wording is that there was no agreement and not that there were no promises. That suggests that Russia's point of view is not entirely wrong.
As I think it was a professor of mine said, international politics is about power, not good. States are always doing things to make themselves more powerful.
In that light, aren't Nato's actions forcing Russia's hands?
-
This post did not contain any content.
Hol up. Didn't NATO guy wank all over daddy's boobs already?
-
If they're going to withdraw then why are they strong arming all the other nations to spending 5% GDP on defense? If they're not in NATO, who gives a fuck what they want?
That's the elephant in the room.
For those who don't know, Trump is threatening tariffs on Spain for not complying.
To me it means that the threat of leaving Nato is a ruse to facilitate armament for a big war against China. Fewer people would support that.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on last edited by [email protected]
So is it their goal to turn the US into an irrelevant backwater or what?
So far they've introduced bills that diminish their own military force, decimated global trading relationships, now they're trying to back out of the final commitments they have left. By the time 2030 rolls around no one will want to be president because they'll have no power.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on last edited by [email protected]
Of course NATO is not a trusted organization to an administration consisting exclusively of Russian agents.
Seriously, are we sure these assholes even speak English and have English names or is there some cover-up going on?
-
Alright, you're just being a Russian mouthpiece.
Oh, Russia was promised NATO wouldn't expand? Not so much.
The entire rest of your comment is similar Russian drivel. I'm not going to spend any more time with this because your opinion is not founded in logic. "You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into." You have a chip on your shoulder and it's hindering your understanding.
As I think it was a professor of mine said, international politics is about power, not good. States are always doing things to make themselves more powerful. None of them are good. Some of them are just temporarily doing more evil to gain power than others. Once you look at the world with this point of view, it makes much more sense (though some leaders are just stupid, crazy, or self-obsessed).
wrote on last edited by [email protected]"You disagree with my point of view, so I'm not gonna respond to any of your arguments because my state propaganda told me your point of view is forbidden and ontologically evil and I can automatically discard any discussion about it. Yes, I'm the one whose opinion is founded on logic"
Please explain me how my concerns about the far right rising (arguably pro-russian) and the worries about the welfare state in Europe and my support for a EU-wide military alliance are Russian talking points.
